The center of narrative gravity is hard to locate; for whom are we rooting, and does anything really ripple outward from this nasty local fight?
It was about brotherhood, standing by each others side against those who are inevitably corrupt, not too mention it shows how outlaws become the real heroes, when they are merely just selling alcohol at a normal status, and then they are brutally stopped by a corrupt lawman. The entire story is turned on itself, where the lawman becomes something more like The Joker. I think this movie is misunderstood, mainly because it's based on a true story from a novel written by one of the real Bondurant Brothers.
Sep 4 - 06:03 PM
Psssssshhh. That's not freaking deep or anything. What you said is just so basic and you can find any kind of "standing by someones side" against corruption in like half the movies out there. The movie was about people who got madder and madder, and then did something about it.
Sep 4 - 07:37 PM
Thats like what 50% of movies are about. It's not an advanced theme at all. The storytelling is basic.
Sep 5 - 01:11 PM
hard for it to be a new or advanced "theme" when its from a book written by someone who lives almost 100 years ago. We know those themes very well, but its still a good movie. No one is looking for anything new from a movie set during Prohibiton, but there's good acting and an entertaining story so what's the issue?
Sep 5 - 08:25 PM
That's what I'm wondering too. Just look at how well Public Enemies made it in 2009, this film's got a magnificent cast, top notch acting, and a somewhat basic yet good story line that would add up to being a great buy not utterly fantastic movie in it's own way. This is probably one of the first movies that I've agreed with Richard Roeper's opinion on.
Sep 9 - 06:48 PM
So dumb. "Advanced theme"... Hahahah.
Sep 12 - 12:49 PM
Are you just going through the negative reviews of this movie one-by-one and disputing them?
Dude, some people didn't like it. Get a life.
Sep 7 - 10:59 PM
No reason if liking it cause it's violent I guess, these single quotes don't really make any sense to be honest -_-
Sep 9 - 06:50 PM
Just because you can't understand these quotes doesn't make them wrong. I liked Lawless, but it is flawed. There are too many characters, meaning that some like Floyd Banner go nowhere, and Tom Hardy's character was too glorified. As stupid and oppressive as prohibition was, Franklin Bondurant in this film is a greedy, violent criminal who talks in pretentious soundbites. Like I said though, I did like Lawless. It was a compelling and well-told story with an incredible performance from Guy Pearce, in my opinion.
Sep 30 - 08:52 PM
We're clearly rooting for the Bondurants, otherwise known as the pro-tag-on-ists. You can spot them by the fact that we spend 100% of the movie with them, seeing every minute of the film from their perspective.
Sep 6 - 05:55 PM
Directors may choose not to lead the audience to empathize with specific characters. If that's your complaint, I don't know that I care to read any of your movie reviews. I appreciate a movie that doesn't make such decisions for me, and maybe even leaves me wondering whom I should empathize with at the end. Would you prefer that the director spoon feed you?
Sep 8 - 06:56 PM
I completely agree.
Sep 9 - 06:51 PM
Neil Brown Jr.
I agree as well Your both right.. Movie was amazing hands down
Sep 26 - 02:11 PM
It was blunt and gritty. I loved it. It wasn't foreign or laden with subtitles so extra points right there.
Sep 11 - 07:37 AM
Haha if you weren't sure for who to root, you should go and see a doctor. I understand you did not like the movie (and respect your opinion) but your point makes no sense thus making me wonder if you're hating on movies simply because you want to.
Sep 21 - 03:38 AM
this film was fantastic! I don't understand why it doesn't have a f'n 100% fresh vote. Best film I've seen in a while. Glad I read roepers review
Sep 26 - 02:09 PM